Reply to the note on article "The evidential reasoning approach for multiple attribute decision analysis using interval belief degrees"
AbstractIn a very recent note by Gao and Ni [B. Gao, M.F. Ni, A note on article "The evidential reasoning approach for multiple attribute decision analysis using interval belief degrees", European Journal of Operational Research, in press, doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2007.10.0381], they argued that Yen's combination rule [J. Yen, Generalizing the Dempster-Shafer theory to fuzzy sets, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics 20 (1990) 559-570], which normalizes the combination of multiple pieces of evidence at the end of the combination process, was incorrect. If this were the case, the nonlinear programming models we proposed in [Y.M. Wang, J.B. Yang, D.L. Xu, K.S. Chin, The evidential reasoning approach for multiple attribute decision analysis using interval belief degrees, European Journal of Operational Research 175 (2006) 35-66] would also be incorrect. In this reply to Gao and Ni, we re-examine their numerical illustrations and reconsider their analysis of Yen's combination rule. We conclude that Yen's combination rule is correct and our nonlinear programming models are valid.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Elsevier in its journal European Journal of Operational Research.
Volume (Year): 197 (2009)
Issue (Month): 2 (September)
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/eor
Dempster-Shafer theory of evidence Combination and normalization of evidence The evidential reasoning approach Multiple attribute decision analysis Interval belief degree;
You can help add them by filling out this form.
reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.Access and download statisticsgeneral information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Wendy Shamier).
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.